Can we agree on this?

Attached: SmartSelectImage_2018-12-20-11-59-54.png (1436x1884, 1.16M)

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PNS_Ghazi
insidedefense.com/insider/cno-24-lcs-deployments-scheduled-between-2019-and-2024
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

i'll agree to nothing. nothing.

Nope, the LCS has a job and does it well, killing subs and being a cheap way to patrol areas. It's fast, so it can get places quickly, and armed enough to where the odd boghammer won't kill it.

It's not a destoryer, it's not a frigate.

Type 022 is far better.

Also the LCS can't really kill subs as well as other ships.

USS Monitor's turret leaked, was prone to jamming in place which in turn rendered it unable to rotate so that the hatches that allowed shot and powder to be brought up to the cannon from below deck could line up so under fire it would often become unable to fire not just because everytime the turret was hit everyone in side was momentarily stunned, until crew manually beat the turret back into sufficient shape for the turret to remain able to turn.

The turret could also not turn with enough precision to allow fine transverse aiming so the entire vessel often had to be turned to help strike moving targets.

Inside, the engines were fed air via a powered ventilation system which itself was powered by the engines via a series of belts that would often get moist and stop working, causing the engines to stop until the belts were dried out and the fans powered manually by the crew whose air and cooling was powered by the same belts and thus there was always a slight risk of suffocation or death by heat exhaustion whenever the engine went out to this cause.

Recoil from the 11 pounder cannon would sometimes be powerful enough that the rear of the cannon would strike the back of the turret if hte recoil system wasn't properly tightened and deform it enough to cause it to jam or injure the gunnery crew. A further problem was that shrapnel and debris could get stuck between the turret edge and the hull also jamming it and requiring crew to exit the turret and walk on the partially flooded decking during combat to unstick it.

In theory there was no real means on the ship to allow it to defend itself from a boarding action by a smaller, quicker vessel (like a row boat), though no one ever tried. To deal with this eventuality some monitors were modified so that steam valves and water pipes that would occasionally injure or wound crewmen could be deliberately used to deter boarders, however these modifications only increased the injuries to crewmembers.

Attached: USS_Monitor_plans.jpg (1280x455, 126K)

We know that the LCS in ASW outfit can't "really kill subs". That's because no dedicated ASW ship "kills subs" in the first place but detects them, then lets its helicopter investigate and if necessary sink the submarine.

Best post. Shame though that you forgot to mention the lower decks would also flood because of the bullshit design of the upper deck and hull.

At least it probably wasn't as expensive as the LCS program.

LCS ASW is a meme, every ship on the Chinese roster that can pull its own weight also has a towed sonar array and a helicopter. What differentiates the Chinese ships from the lackluster ASW of the LCS is that it also has a bow sonar and anti submarine missiles.

For example, the Chinese Renhai can search using its bow sonar and towed array sonar and 2 helicopters dipping sonars. If it detects something the ship can launch short ranged torpedoes or long ranged anti sub missiles. That alone is far more impressive than an LCS that only has a towed sonar array because it needs the helicopter to carry a dipping sonar too.

And the LCS is shorter on weapons. And crew space.

Littorally the worst ship ever.

All this talk of "XXX is the best/worst vessel ever made" is pedantic bullshit meant to slap on a headline to get folks to buy/read it. Just about every US Navy ship that's ever been designed has had problems and upgrades. A seagoing surface combatant is a large and complex piece of machinery that all has to work together, which is next to impossible to achieve. The Arleigh Burke and especially the Ticonderoga had major problems when they were first launched, as does the Ford now.
To add in more concrete info on the LCS, the major concerns are that it does not meet Navy requirements for damaged stability and floodable length, its aluminum hull is prone to punctures, and the modularity it boasted of is not as important or economically viable as hoped.

>bow sonar
miss me with that gay 1950's shit nigga

>Type 022 is far better
>For example, the Chinese Renhai

>220t missile boat
>3500t LCS
>13000t guided missile destroyer

Can't tell if paid shill or just retarded. These three are not remotely comparable in capability.

No shit a 13000t destroyer is going to have greater capability than a 3500t LCS. An 022 likewise doesn't have the strategic flexibility of an LCS- it has no range and lacks any facilities to support aviation. Three different ships with completely different levels of capability.

Type 26 is/will be the gold standard for ASW vessels.

Do you agree that you agree to nothing?

Lolwut? USS Virginia submarines also carry bow sonars developed in the last decade yet those sonars are considered by experts that matter as subpar compared to the new Chinese bow sonars on the Renhai.

>bow sonar
that's a submarine chin sonar u fuck up chicom lmao. eat my horseshoe 1in dick boi

Shoo shoo, French PLA shill.

Then go with the Indian Improved Talwar Class (known as Admiral Grigorovich Class in the Russia) Frigates. It is 4000 tons.

It has both a hull mounted sonar and an SNN-137 towed active array sonar. And a Ka-28 Anti Submarine Warfare Helicopter.

For Anti Submarine armaments, it has 8 cells of Club-N anti submarine rockets, 2x2 533mm torpedoes which can accommodate a Vodopad missile that can carry a torpedo or a nuclear depth charge. And a RBU-6000 depth charge rocket launcher firing 90R ASW rockets and RGB-60 depth rocket bombs.

Keep in mind that this is only a Pajeet frigate, most experts that matter agree that it is not as strong as the more impressive Type 054A super frigate.

Both are the same. Learn your military tech before embarrassing yourself.

>both are same
Nah uh. stay booty flustered chicom fag fuck :^)

>ctrl+f
>impressive
>two results
>both posts are about some chinese plastic trash

>it does not meet Navy requirements for damaged stability and floodable length, its aluminum hull is prone to punctures, and the modularity it boasted of is not as important or economically viable as hoped.
Didn't it also have ferric corrosion where steel components were mounted on the aluminum hull? And the Al hull tends to get beaten to shit in heavier seas, causing stress microfractures since Al is more brittle.

They would just probably copy the Chinese modularity program just like what Russia is doing, putting stuff into containers.

Bongs never had the best ships though. Not in WW1, WW2, Cold war or now.

>littoral shit

Implessive

There´s the dynamite crusier...

>Nope, the LCS has a job and does it well, killing subs and being a cheap way to patrol areas.

Only problem is that it isnt cheap. At all.

The ship is fine however the program itself is complete unorganized pants on head retarded dogshit. Even for normal bullshit procurement standards.

LCS 1 is under $400 million?

>T-the LCS is a-actually deployed compared to the chink destroyer!!!11
>Chink destroyer is actually older than the LCS in pic and has done month long anti piracy patrols around Somalia and the Red Sea.

American quality is just shit. If this LCS is made by China, it would be alright. At least the Chinese know that galvanic elements shouldnt be an issue for a warship if your contractors arent retards.

Attached: filthy US vs clean China.jpg (2459x1681, 533K)

Show me one sub that the us has killed in the last 60 years

Wich is still rather expensive by international standards, given its equipment and range.

Has any sub been intentionally sunk in the last 60 years?

Not even similar friend. T. Sonar engineer.

I haven't heard of the ferric corrosion problems but that seems like a relatively easy problem to solve with just some sacrificial anodes. As far as aluminum being more brittle I have no idea. Materials stuff is really out of my scope of knowledge. Lots of ships have trouble with dynamic forces in rough seas so I'm not too surprised the LCS has that problem. Even the steel hulled Ticonderogas had cracking problems.

You mean the USS Vesuvius, which had 3 fixed pneumatic guns that fired a dynamite charge?
Yeah, that was a pretty retarded idea.

Attached: USS Vesuvius.jpg (870x412, 108K)

>patrol with no gas
>patrol with no crew to fix shit
>patrol with no room to keep spare parts or equipment to fix shit

im gussing you would send out dragsters to patrol your area too

It has 75% of the range of a Burke you dumbass.

The LCS is not a frigate.

I won't agree to that

So wouldnt that mean you agree to something if you don't agree to not agreeing to nothing?

Yeah but its Chinese so it makes me butthurt and Im gonna cope with some forced memes and shitposting

>cheap
It costs like a guided missile frigate, moron.

Chink butthurt is strong today. Something must have happened in the mainland.

Dont shot at me bro Im a fellow butthurt passport American shitposting. May Vishnu bless ya!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PNS_Ghazi

>Nope, the LCS has a job and does it well
The LCS literally doesn't do anything. Just look up the deployment schedule for these "warships" and you'll see how little usage they're actually expected to handle. It's embarrassing.

>being a cheap way
>cheap

user, I...

Attached: 1393536634869.gif (320x240, 1.91M)

aren't they moving to fast frigate designation with upgraded capabilities?

what other ships of comparable tonnage are more capable? (not slav/chinkshit)

Attached: canadat26.jpg (1021x580, 83K)

Yes, let's compare to the only other blue water craft that we have been relying on, the Burke. Yes, it's fucking cheap.

If you compare it to equal ships from other nations, kncludin western ones its still expensive as fuck.

Just because a Lamborghini costs less then a Formula 1 car doesnt mean its a cheap by any sane standards

>Littorally the worst Navy warship ever
not I M P P R E S S I V E

I disagree.

Why didn't we just call it a corvette like every other country would for this kind of ship?

But the Burke actually works, so the cost is justifiable. The LCS doesn't work at all, so even if it only cost 1 dollar it would still be a waste of money.

At least the LCS is way far better and more useful than the Buyan-M of Russia.

I mean, holy shit using MANPADS as CIWS for a river boat? That's embarrassing.

Attached: Dt-vvYfWkAAuP4k.jpg (1200x900, 266K)

If you cant agree that you agree to nothing and cant agree to agreeing to something that would create a double negative meaning you agree to something

I disagree

USS Monitor was revolutionary.
Little Crappy Ships are shit.

>aluminum hull is prone to punctures
And fire.

If you own ONLY formula one cars, a Lamborghini is plenty cheap.

Shitpost.

>Navy builds a boat designed to counter low end asymmetric threats
>public complains it can’t fight modern peer navies and air forces by itself

insidedefense.com/insider/cno-24-lcs-deployments-scheduled-between-2019-and-2024

There are plenty LCS deployments upcoming, typical of any LSC. The first batch just got done at the end of 17 with their deployments.

I think this board is smart enough to design a Jow Forumslittoral combat vessel all by ourselves.

I’m finally gonna ask, what does ‘.t’ stand for?

Checked und keked

I unagree

Attached: 989.png (2000x1333, 172K)

Thanks.
Also I'd have to say the Pensacola class cruisers were pretty awful, as were most of their follow ons. Obviously poor leadership contributed to their heavy losses but Naval architects in the 20s knew sticking 8 inch guns on a light cruiser didn't magically make it a heavy, yet that was how they were billed.

The classification "heavy cruiser" didn't even exist until the Washington naval treaty.

The main selling point of the LCS is it’s modularity, allowing for the drop-in addition of modules tailored for specific roles. The economic performance didn’t materialize but that’s par the course for the Navy.

>drop-in
Actually the modularity concept isn't really 'drop-in' in a sense. You still need specialized equipment on every port that you can use modularity on and a specially trained crew. This might mean that it can only exchange modules in Virginia or it needs a base inside a base if let's say it will be based in Japan.

And yet in a shooting fight the Monitor would push the LCS's shit in

It's worse than all of the ships that it is supposed to replace. It's far too big to be a genuine replacement for the Cyclone-class. And it is too expensive to be a replacement for the Avenger-class. It doesn't have the range or reliability to replace the venerable OHP-class, either.

Attached: zDhmGDp.jpg (3600x1968, 1.96M)

frigates have a hard time with subs and you think a fat corvette that lcs is will have a better time with them?

>strategic capability

what strategic capability a fucking lcs can give to someone? are you kidding? its literally better to get the new bel@hara from france that is 700t only more and pack a lot of more tech and weapons

lcs is a fucking joke end of story

Idk man why don't you get in your dingy and go throw rocks at it see what happens.

They would be great if they cost half as much and were operated by the Coast Guard, which could put them to good use in anti-smuggling/anti-piracy and HA/DR, as well as presence missions in place of the Navy.

Clittoral ship is best ship.

At a range of 100 yards of less I wouldn't be surprised.

AFAIK the ".t" comes from Finland, it means something like "Yours truly" or "SIncerely"

The new Israeli Saar-6 corvette being built has:

>x1 76mm gun
>x16 AShM or cruise missile missile launchers
>x32 VLS cells for Barak-8 SAM's
>x1 16-cell C-Dome anti-AShM launcher
>x2 25mm remote-operated Bushmasters
>x1 20mm CIWS
>x3 324mm torpedo tubes
+ Helicopter hangar

why couldn't the LCS, which is larger by about 500tons, have this level of firepower?

Attached: p1700201.jpg (815x479, 30K)

It could, but then range and endurance would suffer

Yes.
LCS is xbox huge corvette that is replacing frigates. It sacrifices a lot to get silly top speed it doesn't need in most of its tasks. It lacks the modularity it was supposed to have.

and magnets

if you chose not to decide, you still have mde a choice

六四天安門 事件

june 4th Tiananmen Square massacre

Attached: 033B3C92-6713-4D07-9C63-A9FA8AE56BB5.jpg (640x345, 43K)

>American quality is shit because
>Flips though pages
>The paint isn't as shiny!

dumb weeb fag

Israeli boats tend to get btfo by smaller missile boats or coastal missile batteries, because they're never dedicated to a single task which they are optimised for.

The Boat < Destroyer < Carrier roles still reign supreme, if you want a "multirole" vessel you build a carrier with planes for particular roles, if a carrier is too big to be cost-effective for a role, you build a dedicated small boat for that role and you build destroyers to deal with submarines and small boats.

There's a reason no one builds "multirole" sudmarines, after all.

Attached: 1432955206316.jpg (3000x1993, 1.02M)

>>no one builds "multirole" sudmarines
>Posts a multi-role sub
Come on man.

>There's a reason no one builds "multirole" sudmarines, after all.
Wut. Most recent submarines are designed to combine the SSN and SSGN role into a single ship.

An upgunned Sentinel would be better if the goal is to replace the Cyclone.

Attached: Sentinel-cutter.jpg (3705x2410, 1.72M)

This is such a stupid fucking post, you should be embarrassed by this.

>American post
>Be embarrassed

Haha, shut up Chinknik.

Everyone take a look at these retards.

Just because you keep saying something doesn't make it true, user.

It isn't especially good, all things considered, but that's not intrinsic to the LCS. That's not the fault of the design of the boat. The flaws lie in the procurement process, which is all kinds of fucked up. If the LCS were procured for a reasonable cost, in reasonable quantities, and for both the Navy and the coast guard, it would be a decent idea. In its present state it sucks ass. Unfortunately.